Steve James is the Sunday Telegraph's cricket columnist. He also writes on rugby. He played cricket for Glamorgan and England but is just as proud to have represented Lydney and Gloucestershire at rugby.

Thank goodness England v Bangladesh is over

Steve Finn's performance was one of the few highlights from an otherwise pointless exercise (Photo: AP)

Don’t say I didn’t warn you. The good name of Test cricket was besmirched yet again by events at Old Trafford on Saturday evening and then by another quick spell of quivering ineptitude from the Bangladesh batsmen on Sunday afternoon. It was quite shameful stuff.
But let’s move on. To be honest I’m glad the whole thing is over. This Test series has served no purpose whatsoever. It has raised lots of questions- as well as a whole heap being raised just because there has been little else to talk about – but provided precious few answers. It means for instance that, because Jonathan Trott got a double-hundred, that Eoin Morgan’s nascent Test career will have to be put hold.
Some might argue that the exposure of Ajmal Shahzad to Test cricket has been beneficial, but are we really any nearer to knowing whether he is a Test bowler? Are we heck. There was a hint he might be able to produce something similar to the pacy reverse-swing threat once provided by Simon Jones, but until he bowls regularly to Test-class batsmen we will never know. He did bowl at Tamim Iqbal (a Test batsman for sure) for a while and it did not look too good, but that was also his first spell in Test cricket, along with all its understandable nervousness, so we just do not know. Ah, questions, questions.
Of which I will choose a random few. Steven Finn? Looks mighty useful. Keep a lid on the conclusions, though. What is certain is that the ECB have made a shrewd decision not to allow him short-form cricket until the Pakistan Test series. He looks to me like he needs some beefing up. And the Australians will not get a sneak close-up preview.
Matt Prior? What was that all about? People questioning his Test place? Absolute rubbish. It’s his for a long time yet. And he damned well deserves it. Yes, he will lose his 50-over spot to Craig Kieswetter (Prior is not good down the order in one-day cricket and has simply not done enough at the top when given ample opportunities) but I have a feeling that, were Prior injured, Steven Davies, not Kieswetter, would step into the Test side. So all this Prior under pressure from Kieswetter stuff? Poppycock.
Playing six batsmen is cautious and conservative? Since when was scoring lots of runs inherently cautious and conservative? The last time I looked you needed to score more runs than the opposition to win a cricket match. Twenty wickets, blah, blah, blah… The simple truth is that if England possessed a bowler capable of batting at No 7 in a Test match they would play five bowlers. Whatever Tim Bresnan’s supporters might say, they haven’t. End of story. It’s a romantic argument. And it’s becoming very tedious. You’d also think we didn’t have the Ashes, and had to gamble from the off to have any chance of winning them.
At least we can now get our teeth into some real one-day stuff now. Thursday’s squad selection will be interesting. Some have said Andrew Strauss might be struggling for his place, and his captaincy role. I’ll be genuinely gobsmacked if that is the case. Strauss to captain and open, although Michael Lumb may well be in the squad to have a game at some stage, maybe even for Strauss to drop down the order if things do not go as England might like. Strauss certainly deserves that opportunity at the very least. Otherwise the selection will probably be very similar to that which did such brilliant work in Twenty20 in the Caribbean.
Thoughts please…